Types and sex

[Ver]

Do you think your sexual behaviour, attitude towards sex is somehow type-related? And what about fantasies? Is it like a guy who dreams about sex with his teacher is infantile and a guy who dreams a about an innocent school-girl is aggresive? And what about being a gay? Are some types more inclined to be gays that the other? From my own experience I can tell that I know some INFjs who are gays or bi. But they are too few to tell anything. I'd risk saying that T people are less inclined to that (don't know why and I am still not sure

[Ezra]

Do you think your sexual behaviour, attitude towards sex is somehow type-related? And what about fantasies? Is it like a guy who dreams about sex with his teacher is infantile and a guy who dreams a about an innocent school-girl is aggresive? And what about being a gay? Are some types more inclined to be gays that the other? From my own experience I can tell that I know some INFjs who are gays or bi. But they are too few to tell anything. I'd risk saying that T people are less inclined to that (don't know why and I am still not sure

There's the whole myth in MBTT about Feelers being women and if men, mainly gay, or at least feminine, and Thinkers being men and if women, mainly lesbians. This is bullshit, and no doubt some people will carry the same belief through into socionics.

As for sexual behaviour, absolutely. The romantic styles are based on behaviour towards one's mate. Fantasies, however, I don't believe are incorporated into said styles. I think Aggressors can be fans of femdom, and Infantiles can think about boning some chick so hard she screams.

[jessica129]

All I know is it's my favorite past time

[munenori2]

While I think type is correlated with sexual attitudes, Ezra is right to point out that the connection is not so stringent. Not to mention the stereotypical connotations which are associated all up in there.

[liveandletlive]

im glad u mentioned this- for some reason i like being the victim during sex and all of my fantasies are with being the victim too. it remings me of the sex and the city episode where carrie asks, "could it be that what we don't like IRL, we love in sex?" i think there may be some truth to this in that thinking sex = lack of inhibition that during sex you let go of who you usually are. idk tho, who knows. like what would a caregiver be like during sex? maybe it's not necessarily type-related.

[Jarno]

There's the whole myth in MBTT about Feelers being women and if men, mainly gay, or at least feminine, and Thinkers being men and if women, mainly lesbians. This is bullshit, and no doubt some people will carry the same belief through into socionics.

never heard of that myth...

[Ezra]

Okay, maybe not strictly in MBTT, but a woman Thinker would in society probably be seen as butch, and a male Feeler would be seen as a gay.

[Kristiina]

I think I'm victim in real life, sex and fantacies. Don't get the wrong idea here - I do have a lot of willpower and I do get a bit bossy every once in a while, and is also one part of being passionate, and valuing means I don't like slow "relaxing" atmosphere. But I am a victim because I expect the guy to be able to take the lead. I never have any fantacies about cute and gentle Casanova kind of guys. My taste is more to the side of Transporter (played by Jason Statham) or Riddick (played by Vin Diesel).

[FDG]

I don't feel like I show a real preference for the stereotypical victim or agressor roles as they are thought about. I'm not particularly aggressive IRL so I don't have pent up frustration to use in bed, but I'm not a pussy either. In bed thus depends on how I'm feeling at the moment, sometimes it's nice to take the lead and be very assertive, sometimes it's nice to let the girl do everything she wants with you.

I prefer to be the initiator in terms of romantic relationships (probably due to my strong extraversion too), although I do need the girl to show interest in me afterwards, otherwise I tend to doubt it (but who doesn't need his-her partner to show interest??)

[Ms. Kensington]

ime, yes.

i think i tend to fantasize about aggressors but its only fantasy. irl i respond to caregivers involuntarily.

[Blaze]

im glad u mentioned this- for some reason i like being the victim during sex and all of my fantasies are with being the victim too. it remings me of the sex and the city episode where carrie asks, "could it be that what we don't like IRL, we love in sex?" i think there may be some truth to this in that thinking sex = lack of inhibition that during sex you let go of who you usually are. idk tho, who knows. like what would a caregiver be like during sex? maybe it's not necessarily type-related.

hmmm well i guess that would not fit with your erotic attitude of aggressor. but in fantasies, even though you might be the "victim" you're really not. since anything and everything we can come up with in a fantasy is pretty much under our own mind control. so you can come up with fantasies that would never play in IRL the way you make them play out in your fantasy. like if a woman fantasized about having sex with two men she could make those men in her fantasy do whatever she wanted. IRL, i doubt things with two men would go down in a way that a woman really wanted. like, IRL, the men would bond and treat the woman badly. it def would not be all about her.

I don't feel like I show a real preference for the stereotypical victim or agressor roles as they are thought about. I'm not particularly aggressive IRL so I don't have pent up frustration to use in bed, but I'm not a pussy either. In bed thus depends on how I'm feeling at the moment, sometimes it's nice to take the lead and be very assertive, sometimes it's nice to let the girl do everything she wants with you.

I prefer to be the initiator in terms of romantic relationships (probably due to my strong extraversion too), although I do need the girl to show interest in me afterwards, otherwise I tend to doubt it (but who doesn't need his-her partner to show interest??)

this sounds exactly like something my ex would say. yet more evidence of your SLE-ness.

[Rick]

Male vs. female sexual behavior patterns probably differ more than sexual behavior among people of different types. Try to find a woman who isn't interested in being dominated to some degree.

[UDP]

Do you think your sexual behaviour, attitude towards sex is somehow type-related? And what about fantasies? Is it like a guy who dreams about sex with his teacher is infantile and a guy who dreams a about an innocent school-girl is aggresive? And what about being a gay? Are some types more inclined to be gays that the other? From my own experience I can tell that I know some INFjs who are gays or bi. But they are too few to tell anything. I'd risk saying that T people are less inclined to that (don't know why and I am still not sure

Have you heard of Erotic Roles?
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Romance_styles

[UDP]

Male vs. female sexual behavior patterns probably differ more than sexual behavior among people of different types. Try to find a woman who isn't interested in being dominated to some degree.

+1

[Suomea]

Male vs. female sexual behavior patterns probably differ more than sexual behavior among people of different types. Try to find a woman who isn't interested in being dominated to some degree.

Hehe.....good thing I'm an Aggressor Infantile..... I wonder what being an Infantile Infantile is like for a man.

[UDP]

Aggresor Infantile ? What is that supposed to mean?

[munenori2]

Suomea punches babies?

[mikemex]

I know:

* Several infantes that dream about mature women.
* One caregiver ESFj that likes sadom.
* One infantile ENFp and homosexual that I suspect would had turned into homosexuality if he had understood his needs for affection earlier in life. He had an ISTj father who wasn't affective at all.
* One caregiver ISFp who loves young men.
* Two caregiver ESTj who loves young men.

Make your own conclusions.

[Mariano Rajoy]

Yes, sex is type related. An argument could be made for everything being type related; see nation types, etc.

As far as sex, my goal is make sure she reaches climax. Which means different behaviours, really. I try to accomodate except when it gets really weird, like with IEE and watersports, or ESxP and strangulation. Sometimes it is ok, but other times, not so much.

[Blaze]

I try to accomodate except when it gets really weird, like with IEE and watersports, or ESxP and strangulation. Sometimes it is ok, but other times, not so much.

dag, dude, you've had some pretty kinkified experiences!

[xyz]

Strangle?! gao

[BLauritson]

Ooh yeah, nothing like my dual choking me to death in bed. Such a turn-on.

Also lal@the idea of sexual fetishes being type-related. Ridiculousness has reached a new level.

[xyz]

Yeah, it kinda just seems like your thing is your thing, socionics be damned y'know?

[BLauritson]

aye. I think sometimes people can forget where Socionics ends and the rest of reality begins.

[Mariano Rajoy]

Sexual behavior is no more, nor no less explained by socionics as every other human behavior. Sexual behavior is not exempt purely on the basis of the behavior being sexual.

[xyz]

Thanks, that made no fucking sense.

[Mariano Rajoy]

Thanks, that made no fucking sense.

For example, the behavior of 'absent mindedness' is most likely attributed to one type, or one function. The same could be said of a sexual behavior, such as 'likes being restrained'.

We all know that there is not a one to one correlation between socionic description and observation, but it becomes feasible to see different sexual proclivities from different types.

The confusion really does beg the question, 'what is socionics, anyways?'.

[Ms. Kensington]

please use "beg the question" correctly. Sorry i am *this* close to strangling someone at work and people need to let of steam

[BLauritson]

As always I could be wrong with this, but as far as I see it, Socionics is one piece of the puzzle, not the puzzle itself.

[Mariano Rajoy]

please use "beg the question" correctly. Sorry i am *this* close to strangling someone at work and people need to let of steam

I don't see how specialized jargon from philosophy makes my usage incorrect.

Anyhow, "The confusion really does beg the analytic, 'what is socionics, anyways?'."

[Mariano Rajoy]

As always I could be wrong with this, but as far as I see it, Socionics is one piece of the puzzle, not the puzzle itself.

Does sexual behavior lie outside of socionic discourse?

[xyz]

Ah, thank you very much. Yes I totally agree, there is no one to one correlection between any one behavior and any one type. I just tend to see socionic types as people with "groups of behaviours"

[Blaze]

please use "beg the question" correctly. Sorry i am *this* close to strangling someone at work and people need to let of steam

[BLauritson]

Does sexual behavior lie outside of socionic discourse?

EDIT: Having had second thoughts about my tentative response, I'm going to await further clarification on what you mean exactly before giving a response to the question.

[Mariano Rajoy]

Also lal@the idea of sexual fetishes being type-related. Ridiculousness has reached a new level.

?

[BLauritson]

If by the question mark you desire clarification on that statement, I'm basically saying that I think sexual fetishes are completely unrelated to Socionics type. Rather I think they're down to the individual. Reminds me of a TV programme I watched a few years ago about a study done on bizarre sexual fetishes. One hypothesis proposed was that some sexual fetishes are actually related to childhood trauma and sexualising the trauma was the brain's way of coping with it. Though I can't remember any examples that fit that hypothesis (this was a few years ago), I remember one fetish they talked about:

Basically it was a man who I think was in his 40s or 50s, had a family and a full-time job and I think he found life pretty stressful. One of his fantasies was that when he was having sex with a woman, her vagina would open up and swallow him whole. The psychologist who was presenting this show said that a possible explanation for this seemingly bizzare fetish is that because this man feels so burdened with the stresses of life, his fantasy was like going back into the mother's womb, free of responsibility and stress.

The above is one reason (although not the only reason) why I don't think sexual fetishes are type-related.

[marooned]

../

[Amber]

Do you think your sexual behaviour, attitude towards sex is somehow type-related? And what about fantasies? Is it like a guy who dreams about sex with his teacher is infantile and a guy who dreams a about an innocent school-girl is aggresive? And what about being a gay? Are some types more inclined to be gays that the other? From my own experience I can tell that I know some INFjs who are gays or bi. But they are too few to tell anything. I'd risk saying that T people are less inclined to that (don't know why and I am still not sure

if you dream zoophilia, yew Beta.
teacher-student --- Infantile (but kinda aggressive, not a moron)
gay dreams -- Delta (doesn't mean yew actually gay)
bisexual -- Gamma Aggressors
you just lie there and wanna be tied up with wax and blood -- Victim or Infantile (depends on the age of the other person)
necrophilia --- Beta NF sp/sx
orgy -- Beta Fe sx/so (only if you know where the whole group is going and yew all moan the same)
rape -- Aggressor (Beta if you don't actually wanna)
feather fetish -- Caregiver Alpha SF
cum shot -- Decisive
castration - Negativist
premature ejaculation --. Delta NF
orgadsm control - IJ
voyeurism -- Infantile
anal -- Te lead
chastity -- Alpha SF
needle play - Beta Rational duality
priapism -- yew actually LSI sx/sp

[wacey]

haha, crazy creativity!

[Jarno]

Add 'violent' to my type please.